summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/57/e843c9b4da82c19f9bc6487447d16f6c425796
blob: 20bfde00148e865d15aae0f7d087e45338ec5a00 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1W4EMU-0006gI-6z
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:41:46 +0000
X-ACL-Warn: 
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
	by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1W4EMS-0006nM-Fu for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:41:46 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E6D1E108083E;
	Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:41:58 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:41:36 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <CA+s+GJBo7iUEJTfJw2e6qcDmdHNGdDN442Svs5ikVyUL1Jm0Wg@mail.gmail.com>
	<201401161523.38623.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CA+s+GJDeV9-djdEsA_stznNK9zzBA_0xQFV_m6tVygJicuLWuQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJDeV9-djdEsA_stznNK9zzBA_0xQFV_m6tVygJicuLWuQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201401171841.37790.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
	See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
	-0.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
	domain
X-Headers-End: 1W4EMS-0006nM-Fu
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin Core 0.9rc1 release schedule
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 18:41:46 -0000

On Friday, January 17, 2014 11:44:09 AM Wladimir wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> > https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls/luke-jr
> > 
> > These are pretty much all well-tested and stable for months now.
> 
> #3242: Autoconf improvements needs rebase, and comment from jgarzik and me
> taken into account (about -enable-frontends=).

I'll try to get this done over the weekend.

> The others appear to be more controversial as they affect mining/consensus.
> I'd really like to see ACKs from more reviewers and testers there before
> merging.

Can you elaborate on this? I can see how Proposals might, if buggy, affect 
consensus, but the rest shouldn't. I don't think there's anything 
controversial in any of these (does someone disagree with CPFP?).

Luke